GENERAL: `WORLD IS DIFFERENT TODAY'
Urgent change needed to face broad new threats
For all the debate around Canada's defence readiness, all the talk about global security, what's really on the line are the lives of the men and women in uniform, says Guy Thibault, former second-in-command of the Canadian Armed Forces.
If Canada is not equipped to face the challenges of the unstable and unpredictable world ahead, he says, then the ultimate sacrifice will be made by the soldiers, sailors and Air Force personnel required to do the fighting.
Thibault, who retired as a lieutenant-general in 2016 after 38 years in the Canadian military, was deployed to Afghanistan in 2004 as part of the NATO-LED International Security Assistance Force. Looking back at the first few years in Afghanistan, Canada was not well adapted to the fight, he said.
“As a consequence of that, we have 158 dead in Afghanistan,” said the former vice chief of the defence staff.
“And the question is, how many of them could have been saved if we had had different kinds of capabilities in place? The armour protection, better dealing with the improvised explosive devices, better surveillance, better air transport, etc.
“The inevitable consequence of our government's decisions is that it's going to be borne by the men and women who we send into harm's way that may not have all the right tools that affect the mission and the tasks we ask of them.”
But it is becoming increasingly clear that Canada is not prepared for a world that is growing more belligerent, with wars in Europe and the Middle East, and armed conflicts brewing in Africa, Asia and South America.
Defence analysts and senior military leaders point to our aging military equipment; the slow process to buy new hardware, whether it be submarines or artillery shells; our failure to meet NATO spending commitments; a recruiting crisis in the Forces; and, perhaps most damning, a lack of political will.
In a surprising Youtube video in November, Vice-admiral Angus Topshee, commander of the Royal Canadian Navy, said the Navy was in a “critical state” made worse by a decades-long recruiting crisis.
“The RCN faces some very serious challenges right now that could mean we fail to meet our force posture and readiness commitments in 2024 and beyond,” he said.
In September, Gen. Wayne Eyre, chief of the defence staff, told the House of Commons defence committee that Canada was in dire need of ramping up artillery shell production.
“There are many pathways to victory,” he told the committee, “but artillery is pretty key.”
A hundred years ago, in an address to the fledgling League of Nations, Canadian senator Raoul Dandurand remarked that the country was protected by a vast ocean.
“We live in a fireproof house, far from inflammable materials. A vast ocean separates us from Europe,” he said.
But the evolution of warfare since means that Canada can no longer afford to be so untroubled, said Thibault, now chair of the Ottawa-based Conference of Defence Associations Institute (CDAI).
“We can't take our historical isolation from the security challenges for granted anymore because it's an increasingly globalized world, the nature of the threats are increasingly complex,” he said.
“We're no longer living in a fireproof house, whether it be cyber threats, whether it be transnational, organized crime, terrorism, climate change, all the domestic challenges that we can anticipate from the effects of natural disasters. It is an increasingly volatile world.”
Russia's invasion of Ukraine and threats to other European countries, and the call for western countries to respond with defence aid, is a timely example.
“We couldn't have imagined being back in a hot war in Europe,” he said. “I don't think any of the nations in Europe necessarily thought that we would see this unfolding.”
For Thibault, one of the biggest challenges is to get Canadian governments — both Liberal and Conservative — to take defence seriously and accelerate buying the necessary equipment.
“One of the things we have to do differently is we have to accelerate our defence procurements,” he said. “The last two federal elections, there has been zero discussion on national defence and security. This should be a fundamental responsibility of the federal government to make sure that the national interests of the country, our sovereignty, our contributions to international peace and security, are at least a priority.
“The world is changing and I don't think we can take things for granted.”
In September last year, Eyre revealed that the Forces faces nearly $1 billion in cuts as part of Liberal government cutbacks.
“There's no way that you can take almost $1 billion out of the defence budget and not have an impact, so this is something that we're wrestling with now,” the chief of the defence staff told MPS then.
Defence Minister Bill Blair, who is in the process of updating the government's defence policy to give the arms industry a clearer picture of Canada's future defence-spending plans, claimed the cuts would not affect frontline troops.
But while acknowledging to the CBC that the new defence policy must take into account “fiscal challenges,” Blair also outlined numerous priorities that required more money.
“We need to spend more on munitions. We need to spend more on military platforms, planes, submarines and ships. We need to spend more on the equipment, the resources and the training that the Canadian Armed Forces needs,” he said.
Canada spent an estimated $26.93 billion on its military in 2023–24. For the 2024–25 fiscal year, that will drop to $25.73 billion.
That raises the thorny question of how Canada can meet its NATO commitment of spending two per cent of its GDP on defence. Currently, Canada spends 1.3 per cent, with projections that could rise to 1.59 per cent over the next five years, but there appears little inclination to meet the NATO target.
According to calculations by the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Canada would have to increase spending by $14.5 billion to reach the target in 2024–25 — an increase none of the federal parties seems interested in championing.
Security analysts generally agree on the main reason Ottawa isn't meeting its NATO commitment: Canada hasn't felt particularly threatened.
But with Russia, Iran, North Korea and China deploying military and paramilitary methods in their efforts to realign the global order, the threats to Canada have developed despite our indifference.
“Canada keeps failing to meet its NATO spending targets because we've gotten used to the idea that we are far away from threats,” said Youri Cormier, executive director of the CDAI.
“The reality is that the world is different today. Threats are transnational and having three oceans no longer protects you like it did a century ago. Our leaders need to make tough decisions about how to spend, and that means being honest with Canadians about this new world.”
Thibault said most countries are reassessing their defence spending in light of changing events. Last year, for example, Australia unveiled the most significant overhaul of its military preparedness since WWII.
“We have to up our game and we have to really be better prepared for these threats than we currently are,” Cormier said.
One emerging threat that Canada faces is in the Arctic from Russia, primarily, but also China. The most basic element is the need to maintain national sovereignty there, but protecting Canadian-owned Arctic resources is also necessary.
“Canadian policy historically has been to not want to militarize, or not want to see the Arctic militarized, to have it as a region of co-operation and security,” said Thibault. “It is a very harsh environment. It's a long way away, with a lack of infrastructure. It's an environment which is very sparsely populated, but as climate change continues, clearly the accessibility of the Far North becomes a reality.”
Thibault noted that Jens Stoltenberg, general secretary of NATO, visited the Arctic in August 2022.
Stoltenberg has consistently said that “the shortest path to North America for Russian missiles or bombers would be over the North Pole,” and has urged an upgrade of the NORAD early-warning system.
Norad, the North American Aerospace Defence Command, is a joint Canada-u.s. operation that uses a network of satellites, ground-based radar, airborne radar and jet fighters to provide aerospace warnings and control over North America.
Norad's commander, American Gen. Glen Vanherck, told Air and Space Forces magazine last year that China and Russia have more access and opportunity in the Arctic.
“So, the importance of the Arctic can't be overstated,” Vanherck said.
Canada has committed $38.6 billion over the next two decades to modernize Norad.
Thibault said he hopes that along with the money will come more strategic thinking about protecting Canadian interests in the Far North.
“The first thing is monitoring, so we actually know what's going on up there. And that's surveillance from space, surveillance on the ground, defence under the waters. It's a vast territory, so the kind of technologies that we'll need to invest in will be really important,” he said.
The Indo-pacific is another area where Canada will need to seriously engage: the region is already a major hotbed of the emerging political instability, especially with China's naval assertiveness, and its threats to Taiwan. A Chinese invasion of Taiwan would have massive repercussions globally, not least because Taiwan produces 90 per cent of the world's semiconductor chips used in everything computerized, from cars to defence systems to phones.
In 2023, Canada released its Indo-pacific Strategy, which acknowledged that “China's assertive pursuit of its economic and security interests, advancement of unilateral claims, foreign interference and increasingly coercive treatment of other countries and economies have significant implications in the region, in Canada and around the world.”
Thibault said China's “dangerous game” has countries around the world concerned, and Canada can't ignore it.
“Our interest with our allies is definitely to be more present there (in the Pacific) and to affirm the independent right of nations for their sovereignty to be respected,” Thibault said.
With 40 economies, four billion people and $47.19 trillion in economic activity, the Indo-pacific is also a ripe trading opportunity.
But a western defence presence in the region will be important to maintaining open trade, and one of the keys to that will be submarines, said Thibault.
“I would expect that in any future policy update by this government, or by any future government (would be) that the future of submarines for Canada will be very important — hugely expensive capabilities, but really versatile.
“Very much part of what I think would be value-added to not only our alliances in NATO, but certainly in the Indo-pacific and in our own territorial waters,” he said.
Canada has four aging Victoria-class submarines bought second-hand from the British government in 1998.
A National Post report in November revealed only two of them had been at sea over the past four years, and only for a total of 214 days.
Meanwhile, the Navy's 12 Halifax-class frigates are approaching the end of their 30-year lifespan, but will have to stay operational for another 15 years because there are no replacements ready.
On a more encouraging note, late last year the government announced it was buying up to 16 Boeing P-8A Poseidon aircraft, as part of the Canadian Multi-mission Aircraft (CMMA) project. And in July, the government agreed to pay $3.6 billion for nine new aircraft that can be used for troop transport and mid-air refuelling, although they will also sometimes be used as passenger planes for the prime minister and other government officials.
But Thibault said it isn't only big-ticket items that Canada needs. For instance, drones have proven to be particularly versatile, capable of firing missiles but also delivering items to remote locations, surveillance and mapping.
In December, the government announced it was spending $2.5 billion to buy 11 drones, each roughly the size of a jet fighter.
But despite the few recent announcements, the pace of procurement seems only to fall further behind the military's needs: the munitions, planes, submarines, ships, equipment, and more, all identified by Blair as important priorities, are facing long procurement holdups and a shrinking budget.
Last year, the CDAI released a public letter signed by 60 officials, with a simple message: Canada needs to act faster on procurement and address the inadequacies in defence.
It included signatures from former Conservative ministers Jason Kenney and Peter Mackay, former Liberal ministers John Manley, Anne Mclellan and David Collenette, former Supreme Court Justice Beverley Mclachlin and former senators, senior government officials and a premier.
“This was not a group of lobbyists,” said Thibault. “It was, rather, Canadians who understand our actual interests are definitely threatened in this world and that we can't continue to conduct business as usual.”
As he said, lives are on the line.
WE CAN'T TAKE OUR HISTORICAL ISOLATION FROM ... SECURITY CHALLENGES FOR GRANTED ANYMORE.